Smt. A.Vijayalakshmi vs The State Of Telangana
2022 Latest Caselaw 6067 Tel

                                               Crl.Petition No.186 of 2022
                                1




      THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE K.SURENDER

           CRIMINAL PETITION No.186 OF 2022

O R D E R:

This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 482 of the

Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short 'Cr.P.C.') by the

petitioner seeking to quash the order dated 16.11.2021 passed

by XII Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate at Hyderabad in

Crl.M.P.No.2487 of 2021 in C.C.No.203 of 2016.

2. Heard. Perused the record.

3. The petitioner is questioning the correctness of the

aforesaid impugned order refusing to return the sale deed

bearing Document No.15608 of 2013 dated 17.09.2013. The

petitioner is the purchaser in the said sale deed. Petitioner is

the third party to the present case and she is not the accused.

4. On the allegations made, the husband of petitioner who is

respondent No.2, respondent Nos.3 and 4 herein were

convicted by the XII Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Crl.Petition No.186 of 2022

Hyderabad by judgment dated 18.01.2021 for the offences

under Sections 406, 408 and 420 of IPC. The respondents-

Accused preferred an appeal against the said judgment before

learned II Additional Metropolitan Sessions Judge, Nampally,

Hyderabad vide Criminal Appeal No.52 of 2021 and it is

pending.

5. Petitioner filed an application before the XII Additional

Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Hyderabad for return of

aforesaid sale deed and the same was dismissed by the said

Court on the ground that the appeal is pending.

6. As seen from the Judgment of the learned Magistrate

dated 18.01.2021, the said sale deed was not marked during

the course of trial.

7. Section 452 of Cr.P.C. prescribes disposal of property

after conclusion of trial. Any document produced before the Crl.Petition No.186 of 2022

Court or in its custody shall be returned with condition or

without condition imposed by the said Court.

8. Admittedly, the said sale deed was not marked during the

course of trial. There are no reasons mentioned in the

impugned order as to how the unmarked document would be

relevant in the appeal proceedings. For the said reasons, the

said sale deed is liable to be returned.

9. Accordingly, Criminal Petition is allowed and the order

dated 16.11.2021 passed by XII Additional Chief Metropolitan

Magistrate, Hyderabad in Crl.M.P.No.2487 of 2021 in C.C.No.203

of 2016, is hereby quashed and the concerned Court is directed

to return the sale deed bearing Document No.15608 of 2013

dated 17.09.2013 to the petitioner.

Miscellaneous Petitions, pending if any, shall stand closed.

_____________ K.SURENDER, J Date: 22.11.2022 rev